On Thu, 2012-05-24 at 14:46 +0200, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > On Thu, 24 May 2012 11:07:06 +0200, Alexander Larsson wrote: > There are many ways how to solve this problem, unfortunately nobody knows what > is your problem, there are too many close but still different problems in this > basket. You have delivered solution without stating the problem first. I don't think there has to be a specific "problem". In fact, I think Fedora shouldn't really care what *my* problem is. What is interesting is: I have this feature; It has a certain cost (increase in size) and it gives certain features. Is the price worth the features it gives? Now, I don't want to repeat everything said before about what minidebuginfo can do, but I'll give some short examples of things that are nice to have and hard to do well without local debuginfo. * Write backtraces to syslog on coredumps * Allow ABRT to do better duplication matching (the ABRT developers even want minidebuginfo!) * Always get some minimal level of backtrace quality, even for rpms built locally or from other repositories which are not availible on the retrace servers. (Assuming they are built on a F18 or later which has this feature.) * Do system wide profiling and tracing without having to install a lot of debuginfo. * Help developers by always having at least some level of debuginfo, even for e.g. uncommon dependencies that you don't typically have debuginfo for, or when you don't have a network connection to get debuginfo packages. So, does these advantages outweigh the cost? -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
